RUFFIN v. BRANN et al
DANIEL O RUFFIN |
FREMONT ANDERSON and DAVID GEORGE |
1:2009cv00087 |
March 12, 2009 |
US District Court for the District of Maine |
Habeas Corpus (Prison Condition) Office |
MARGARET J. KRAVCHUK |
JOHN A. WOODCOCK |
None |
Federal Question |
42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 65 ORDER adopting 58 Report and Recommended Decision for 54 Motion for Summary Judgment filed by DAVID GEORGE and FREMONT ANDERSON; adopting 63 Report and Recommended Decision for 54 Motion for Summary Judgment; granting 54 Motion for Summary Judgment; dismissing 1 Complaint and 45 attachments to Complaint. By JUDGE JOHN A. WOODCOCK, JR. (MFS) |
Filing 63 REPORT AND RECOMMENDED DECISION re 54 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by DAVID GEORGE, FREMONT ANDERSON. Objections to R&R due by 2/1/2010. By MAGISTRATE JUDGE MARGARET J. KRAVCHUK. (CWP) |
Filing 58 REPORT AND RECOMMENDED DECISION re 54 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by DAVID GEORGE, FREMONT ANDERSON. Objections to R&R due by 1/4/2010. By MAGISTRATE JUDGE MARGARET J. KRAVCHUK. (CWP) |
Filing 53 ORDER affirming Report and Recommended Decision re 50 Report and Recommendations; granting 24 Motion to Dismiss. By JUDGE JOHN A. WOODCOCK, JR. (jgw) |
Filing 50 REPORT AND RECOMMENDED DECISION re 24 MOTION to Dismiss filed by BRUCE BRANN, DWIGHT FOWLES, R A PEASE, MARTIN MAGNUSSON, JEFFREY MERRILL. Objections to R&R due by 10/30/2009. By MAGISTRATE JUDGE MARGARET J. KRAVCHUK. (CWP) |
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Maine District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.